Based on last night’s local election results, the Meacher by-election should be V interesting.
Do you think? Bad night for Labour but poor night for UKIP too. If the local by-elections are any guide then OW&R will be a comfortable Labour hold ahead of the Tories in second on a lowish turnout. There may well be a net swing to the Tories but Labour will spin that as the drop-off of Meacher's personal vote / UKIP voters 'going home'. I'm not sure either argument will hold too much water (how many Tory-inclined voters went for Meacher on a personal level? Were UKIP's voters really ex-Tory?) but once you're into that kind of detail the public's tuned out. Labour won't lose and won't come close to losing so whatever the underlying movements, the media will ignore it, as will politicians looking for a reason to.
However, for psephological nerds, it could tell us a lot about the lie of the land going into next year's local and PCC elections.
UKIP came second in the seat even in May when the Tories won a national majority. I expect both Labour and the Tories to lose vote share, Labour to hold but with their majority down, UKIP up
Yes but UKIP have been down in every election and poll since the GE sometimes by quite large percentages. Haven't they lost all their defences since the GE, except for one hold? They have also lost their one Council. Labour win easily, Tories 2nd, UKIP third and saved deposit if they're lucky.
No, they'll do better than that. There are still a lot of protest votes and this part of Oldham has a well-established and sizable populist-right section. I'd be surprised to see UKIP drop below 15%. I'd also expect more than three parties to save their deposits.
How are more than three parties going to keep their deposits?
At the GE the hated Liberals got 3.7% and the Greens 1.9%. Corbyn is definitely showing signs of squeezing the Greens and the hated Liberals are unlikely to find any purchase in this sort of area.
3.7% is near enough 5% and the Lib Dems have polled reasonably well there in the past (19% in 2010). If they're to make any kind of pitch the for centre ground now they're out of government, they need to be taking some of Labour's right.
I wouldn't rule out some kind of independent either standing and holding their deposit, though that will depend on the candidate.
Leaked memo reveals high-profile Labour MPs are under threat from left-wing activists
Politicians including Harriet Harman, Chuka Umunna and ex-mayoral candidate David Lammy are believed to be among the targets of left-wing activists looking to oust them from their seats
Mr. Eagles, the capitalist rightwing pigdog fascists must be culled! Only then can the People's Party have truly representative left wing heroes to lead the revolution!
Mr. Eagles, the capitalist rightwing pigdog fascists must be culled! Only then can the People's Party have truly representative left wing heroes to lead the revolution!
Talking of traitorous pig dog defectors
How Cambridge Five spies turned on each other: Kim Philby exposed two of his fellow recruits to save himself when their double lives unravelled
One of the controversial issues discussed last night was the shortening of the cenotaph ceremony with Cameron laying the only political wreath. I suggest that a solution nobody could possibly object to is have the wreath laid by the Speaker. (Also, how about raising tax on sugary products one at a time, budget by budget, finishing, in about 50 year's time with plain chocolate digestive biscuits?)
The Prime Minister represents the country as a whole, regardless of what party he or she comes from.
Why are people trying to make political capital out of this?
Utter bilge.
HM The Queen represents the country in all its majesty and splendour.
Cameron is head of government and as PM is first among equals as his party representative at the Cenotaph. No change is required.
Not sure if I am reading this correctly, but the author appears to be:
a) drastically over egging her job (magazine editor) or drastically underpaid for it. Perhaps it is part time b) retraining as a student but yearning for a middle class life
Perhaps the most objectionable bit is about her son not being able to go to university because she needs more money for the household. Seems incredibly poor show.
In short: articles like this and appearances by the likes of Ken Clarke last night suggest that, when even the edge cases are not that bad, the tax credits reform is going to be a success despite all the naysaying.
''In short: articles like this and appearances by the likes of Ken Clarke last night suggest that, when even the edge cases are not that bad, the tax credits reform is going to be a success despite all the naysaying.''
At last, the real reason this is being opposed tooth and nail by the opposition.
Mr. Mortimer, lots of authors really struggle to make much at all, and I think it's 95% plus who don't even make £10k a year.
On the other hand, she says she's got a full-time job and is a magazine editor. If the full-time job is being a writer, and the magazine editor gig is relatively small time, that could make the numbers stack up.
Look at all those lovely five star ratings. I bet not many authors have books which include lesbian cannibalism, or committing adultery on the first page.
''Leanne Wood was unimpressive on R4Today prog this AM. ''
Nobody ever seems to call Leanne out on the central contradiction of her position.
Welsh independence would need an austerity that makes what is going on in Greece look like a picnic.
No-one needs to when they're so far off achieving it.
In fact, do Plaid want independence? They've always run shy of the Big Goal; happy enough to talk about devolution and the Welsh language but timid on independence itself.
''Leanne Wood was unimpressive on R4Today prog this AM. ''
Nobody ever seems to call Leanne out on the central contradiction of her position.
Welsh independence would need an austerity that makes what is going on in Greece look like a picnic.
No-one needs to when they're so far off achieving it.
In fact, do Plaid want independence? They've always run shy of the Big Goal; happy enough to talk about devolution and the Welsh language but timid on independence itself.
They would be far more successful as a party if they dropped the independence requirement, in my opinion.
Amazing that with 300,000,000 Americans to choose from, the surname Bush and Clinton dominates politics. And not just the name - they are sons, brothers and wives.
At least North Korea is honest about its nepotism
Given Bush's floundering, there's obviously a limit to how far nepotism takes you.
It's not really nepotism though is it? It's closer to aristocracy.
Bush isn't running because he was picked to do so by a member of his family but rather because he has inherited the advantages and system that those members who went before him had.
London’s Communist Party declared full support for Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn on welfare cuts, but failed to spell his name right on the press release.
In a document entitled “Corbin correct on tax credits”, the party challenged Labour MPs who were not supporting the leader.
Leaked memo reveals high-profile Labour MPs are under threat from left-wing activists
Politicians including Harriet Harman, Chuka Umunna and ex-mayoral candidate David Lammy are believed to be among the targets of left-wing activists looking to oust them from their seats
what are we looking at here? A protestor breaks through the police cordon, runs towards or stands close to some protected people and gets tackled by the police?
Am I supposed to be outraged at the civil liberties violation? Or impressed by the efficiency of the police?
The police will have allocated an area for all the protesters for and against.
This one left that area, put herself in close proximity to let's call them high value targets and was then removed by the police.
What on earth is the problem?
Since when was free speech being subject to a licence from the government not a problem?
If there were genuine security concerns then the police have a right to act to protect the public and potential targets. Simply waving flags is not sufficient evidence to identify someone as a threat.
Miss Plato, so-called 'correct spelling' is an authoritarian plot of the hierarchy to punish non-establishment figures who exhibit individuality by spelling things in a non-bourgeois approved way! It is simply a tool used by the aristocracy to crush the proletariat!
MD Your Sir Edric sounds like a likely lad..I have yet to read Mr Knox,s reputedly fine missive... Ice Twins...which I am saving for my next film shoot in November...
''In short: articles like this and appearances by the likes of Ken Clarke last night suggest that, when even the edge cases are not that bad, the tax credits reform is going to be a success despite all the naysaying.''
At last, the real reason this is being opposed tooth and nail by the opposition.
@HYUFD Re: Oldham West & Royton. You said the Tories were "nowhere" in this seat. I can't let you get away with that: UKIP 20.6% Tories 19%
Mr song, what price will you offer me Ukip keeping their deposit in Oldham?
Ah, backing down and changing the subject! Sorry but I think it quite likely that UKIP will only lose 75% of their vote and end up with a deposit saving 5%, so no thanks.
Why would UKIP lose 75% of their vote? The party's currently polling the teens.
The bet that was proposed to me was whether I thought UKIP would go from 20% to less than 5% and I turned it down as I thought it unlikely. As you say they are polling better than that, they may only lose 25% of their vote. However I suspect that voters will pile in behind the party that is seen as the main challenger, and I predict that that will be the Tories.
Mr song, this is what you said earlier this morning:
Labour win easily, Tories 2nd, UKIP third and saved deposit if they're lucky.
So I'll ask again - what price are Ukip to keep their deposit?
If you're frit of that - what price Ukip to poll 20% or higher?
A Tory MP who sparked ridicule after condemning a made-up drug called 'Cake' has been given the job of scrutinising the Government's crackdown on legal highs.
Veteran backbencher David Amess was tricked into appearing on the 1990s comedy show Brass Eye where he was filmed warning people off the dangers of 'Cake' – which he described as 'a big yellow death bullet'.
Mr Amess even asked questions about the made-up drug in Parliament after being taken in by the satirical Channel 4 show.
Miss Plato, as is known, I am upright man of impeccable moral standing. There's nothing desirable about a mostly drunk fornicating thief, endowed with all the loyalty of a nymphomaniac and the moral consistency of a latter day Roman emperor.
Mr. Dodd, thanks. I wrote the character in the reverse manner (ie gave him a long list of vices and then tried to find one or two virtues [he's nice to horses]). Fun but tricky to write a selfish, conniving git in a likeable way.
One of the controversial issues discussed last night was the shortening of the cenotaph ceremony with Cameron laying the only political wreath. I suggest that a solution nobody could possibly object to is have the wreath laid by the Speaker. (Also, how about raising tax on sugary products one at a time, budget by budget, finishing, in about 50 year's time with plain chocolate digestive biscuits?)
The Prime Minister represents the country as a whole, regardless of what party he or she comes from.
Why are people trying to make political capital out of this?
Utter bilge.
HM The Queen represents the country in all its majesty and splendour.
Cameron is head of government and as PM is first among equals as his party representative at the Cenotaph. No change is required.
My reading is that at least some of the impetus for this has come from the Palace. The Queen is 89 and the Duke of Edinburgh, 94, even if he looks at least a decade younger.
The thread a few weeks ago on Corbyn's dress choice for the occasion showed how the formal ceremony has expanded over recent years. Not that long ago there were only three party leaders who laid wreaths and three or four senior royals. Now there are phalanxes of both. Change has already taken place and a little trimming back, particularly given the advanced ages of Liz'n'Phil is not out of order.
I don't agree that Cameron is simply first among equals. He represents the Government; the other parties represent the Opposition. While I personally preferred the longer version, which I hope can be reverted to in due course, I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with the shorter one.
One of the controversial issues discussed last night was the shortening of the cenotaph ceremony with Cameron laying the only political wreath. I suggest that a solution nobody could possibly object to is have the wreath laid by the Speaker. (Also, how about raising tax on sugary products one at a time, budget by budget, finishing, in about 50 year's time with plain chocolate digestive biscuits?)
The Prime Minister represents the country as a whole, regardless of what party he or she comes from.
Why are people trying to make political capital out of this?
Utter bilge.
HM The Queen represents the country in all its majesty and splendour.
Cameron is head of government and as PM is first among equals as his party representative at the Cenotaph. No change is required.
Of course the PM has a different role to the Queen, and to suggest otherwise is ridiculous.
But if the ceremony needs to be shorter (on which I have no view) I don't see why the PM can't represent the "political class"
"While we respect Turing's right to charge patients and insurance companies whatever it believes is appropriate, there may be more cost-effective compounded options for medications, such as Daraprim, for patients, physicians, insurance companies and pharmacy benefit managers to consider."
''In short: articles like this and appearances by the likes of Ken Clarke last night suggest that, when even the edge cases are not that bad, the tax credits reform is going to be a success despite all the naysaying.''
At last, the real reason this is being opposed tooth and nail by the opposition.
The woman on Question Time appears to be running a staggeringly unsuccessful business and expects the taxpayer to make up for its lack of profitability.
The Tories need to be careful over this, but people aren't *entitled* to work at whatever takes their fancy and trust the state to make up their standard of living accordingly. Plenty of people work at jobs that they barely tolerate or actively detest.
Miss Plato, legal highs seem very difficult. Anything effective may be so broad that the legislation traps other, perfectly legitimate (as it were) drugs. Anything specific can be, and has been, easily side-stepped by tweaking the chemical composition of the drug.
Of course, if some people weren't bloody muppets, taking weird, unknown drugs with unknown effects, this wouldn't be an issue.
Never taken drugs myself (and very rarely drink), but legal highs seem far more foolish to me than even 'established' drugs, where you have a better idea of what they're supposed to do (although bad batches and being cut with rat poison remains a problem).
Farage made the point last night that whether a ginger beer costs 65p or 75p he would still buy it, but what stopped him was finding out there were 14 teaspoons full of sugar in each can
I found the protein shakes I was drinking contained 12 spoons of sugar and changed to a healthier and more expensive brand
So maybe a simple symbol of s spoon with a number next to rather than a tax would be best .
''In short: articles like this and appearances by the likes of Ken Clarke last night suggest that, when even the edge cases are not that bad, the tax credits reform is going to be a success despite all the naysaying.''
At last, the real reason this is being opposed tooth and nail by the opposition.
The woman on Question Time appears to be running a staggeringly unsuccessful business and expects the taxpayer to make up for its lack of profitability.
The Tories need to be careful over this, but people aren't *entitled* to work at whatever takes their fancy and trust the state to make up their standard of living accordingly. Plenty of people work at jobs that they barely tolerate or actively detest.
Your business doesn't have to be unsuccesful to get CTCs ^_~
But I suspect the lady in the audience isn't building up equity.
My reading is that at least some of the impetus for this has come from the Palace. The Queen is 89 and the Duke of Edinburgh, 94, even if he looks at least a decade younger.
The thread a few weeks ago on Corbyn's dress choice for the occasion showed how the formal ceremony has expanded over recent years. Not that long ago there were only three party leaders who laid wreaths and three or four senior royals. Now there are phalanxes of both. Change has already taken place and a little trimming back, particularly given the advanced ages of Liz'n'Phil is not out of order.
I don't agree that Cameron is simply first among equals. He represents the Government; the other parties represent the Opposition. While I personally preferred the longer version, which I hope can be reverted to in due course, I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with the shorter one.
My personal opinion is that if the Queen is getting too old to take a full role in the memorial service then perhaps she should follow the example of her Dutch counterpart and enjoy a well earned retirement. Prince Charles is 66 himself.
However I understand it is not just concern about her personally but also the veterans who are also very old men now. In the biting November cold what is done should be what works for the surviving veterans and is respectful to the fallen, not what makes political parties smile.
The PM and the Monarch represent the country on occasions outside of politics.
Farage made the point last night that whether a ginger beer costs 65p or 75p he would still buy it, but what stopped him was finding out there were 14 teaspoons full of sugar in each can
I found the protein shakes I was drinking contained 12 spoons of sugar and changed to a healthier and more expensive brand
So maybe a simple symbol of s spoon with a number next to rather than a tax would be best .
Good suggestion!
I look at calories on the front when its there but that's about it; the sugar number (and other numbers) is fairly incomprehensible and generally ignored. Having all pre-packaged food and drink have a "teaspoons of sugar" per serving would make sense, since that's a unit of measurement easily understood.
My reading is that at least some of the impetus for this has come from the Palace. The Queen is 89 and the Duke of Edinburgh, 94, even if he looks at least a decade younger.
The thread a few weeks ago on Corbyn's dress choice for the occasion showed how the formal ceremony has expanded over recent years. Not that long ago there were only three party leaders who laid wreaths and three or four senior royals. Now there are phalanxes of both. Change has already taken place and a little trimming back, particularly given the advanced ages of Liz'n'Phil is not out of order.
I don't agree that Cameron is simply first among equals. He represents the Government; the other parties represent the Opposition. While I personally preferred the longer version, which I hope can be reverted to in due course, I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with the shorter one.
My personal opinion is that if the Queen is getting too old to take a full role in the memorial service then perhaps she should follow the example of her Dutch counterpart and enjoy a well earned retirement. Prince Charles is 66 himself.
However I understand it is not just concern about her personally but also the veterans who are also very old men now. In the biting November cold what is done should be what works for the surviving veterans and is respectful to the fallen, not what makes political parties smile.
The PM and the Monarch represent the country on occasions outside of politics.
It is far easier for the Queen of the Netherlands, the King of Belgium or Spain or the Pope to abdicate. For Elizabeth II, it's not just the Act that would be needed through the UK parliament, similar Acts would be required for each of the other territories of which she's queen. The same would be true of a regency (which, if it comes to it, is what I'd expect to occur rather than an outright abdication).
"While we respect Turing's right to charge patients and insurance companies whatever it believes is appropriate, there may be more cost-effective compounded options for medications, such as Daraprim, for patients, physicians, insurance companies and pharmacy benefit managers to consider."
It now has a $1 US direct subsitute competitor !
Compounded products are not direct substitutes. They are not AB-rated by the FDA as they have not provided statistical evidence that they are bioquivalent and the same active AUC as the originator product.
They are intended to be used for when there is no suitable alternative (they are called Specials in the UK for that reason) - typically to do with allergens, taste-masking and and customised products for patients who find it hard to swallow.
None of this changes the fact that Martin Shkreli is an evil, gouging, villain who should be dragged around China by the balls.
One of the controversial issues discussed last night was the shortening of the cenotaph ceremony with Cameron laying the only political wreath. I suggest that a solution nobody could possibly object to is have the wreath laid by the Speaker. (Also, how about raising tax on sugary products one at a time, budget by budget, finishing, in about 50 year's time with plain chocolate digestive biscuits?)
The Prime Minister represents the country as a whole, regardless of what party he or she comes from.
Why are people trying to make political capital out of this?
Utter bilge.
HM The Queen represents the country in all its majesty and splendour.
Cameron is head of government and as PM is first among equals as his party representative at the Cenotaph. No change is required.
My reading is that at least some of the impetus for this has come from the Palace. The Queen is 89 and the Duke of Edinburgh, 94, even if he looks at least a decade younger.
The thread a few weeks ago on Corbyn's dress choice for the occasion showed how the formal ceremony has expanded over recent years. Not that long ago there were only three party leaders who laid wreaths and three or four senior royals. Now there are phalanxes of both. Change has already taken place and a little trimming back, particularly given the advanced ages of Liz'n'Phil is not out of order.
I don't agree that Cameron is simply first among equals. He represents the Government; the other parties represent the Opposition. While I personally preferred the longer version, which I hope can be reverted to in due course, I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with the shorter one.
I refer the Honourable Herders to the likely outcry if this change had occurred during the Blair years. The outcry from Conservatives would have been louder than some of TSE's shoes.
The time taken by the politicians to lay their wreaths is negligible but the symbolism is not.
Cameron would do well to advise that such changes are not merited and recommend that the present arrangements are kept in place.
One of the controversial issues discussed last night was the shortening of the cenotaph ceremony with Cameron laying the only political wreath. I suggest that a solution nobody could possibly object to is have the wreath laid by the Speaker. (Also, how about raising tax on sugary products one at a time, budget by budget, finishing, in about 50 year's time with plain chocolate digestive biscuits?)
The Prime Minister represents the country as a whole, regardless of what party he or she comes from.
Why are people trying to make political capital out of this?
Utter bilge.
HM The Queen represents the country in all its majesty and splendour.
Cameron is head of government and as PM is first among equals as his party representative at the Cenotaph. No change is required.
My reading is that at least some of the impetus for this has come from the Palace. The Queen is 89 and the Duke of Edinburgh, 94, even if he looks at least a decade younger.
The thread a few weeks ago on Corbyn's dress choice for the occasion showed how the formal ceremony has expanded over recent years. Not that long ago there were only three party leaders who laid wreaths and three or four senior royals. Now there are phalanxes of both. Change has already taken place and a little trimming back, particularly given the advanced ages of Liz'n'Phil is not out of order.
I don't agree that Cameron is simply first among equals. He represents the Government; the other parties represent the Opposition. While I personally preferred the longer version, which I hope can be reverted to in due course, I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with the shorter one.
I refer the Honourable Herders to the likely outcry if this change had occurred during the Blair years. The outcry from Conservatives would have been louder than some of TSE's shoes.
The time taken by the politicians to lay their wreaths is negligible but the symbolism is not.
Cameron would do well to advise that such changes are not merited and recommend that the present arrangements are kept in place.
No-one's stopping the other leaders from laying wreaths; they're just doing it together - the same as the military representatives, the High Commissioners always have done, and the same as it's proposed the junior royals now will.
One of the controversial issues discussed last night was the shortening of the cenotaph ceremony with Cameron laying the only political wreath. I suggest that a solution nobody could possibly object to is have the wreath laid by the Speaker. (Also, how about raising tax on sugary products one at a time, budget by budget, finishing, in about 50 year's time with plain chocolate digestive biscuits?)
The Prime Minister represents the country as a whole, regardless of what party he or she comes from.
Why are people trying to make political capital out of this?
Utter bilge.
HM The Queen represents the country in all its majesty and splendour.
Cameron is head of government and as PM is first among equals as his party representative at the Cenotaph. No change is required.
My reading is that at least some of the impetus for this has come from the Palace. The Queen is 89 and the Duke of Edinburgh, 94, even if he looks at least a decade younger.
The thread a few weeks ago on Corbyn's dress choice for the occasion showed how the formal ceremony has expanded over recent years. Not that long ago there were only three party leaders who laid wreaths and three or four senior royals. Now there are phalanxes of both. Change has already taken place and a little trimming back, particularly given the advanced ages of Liz'n'Phil is not out of order.
I don't agree that Cameron is simply first among equals. He represents the Government; the other parties represent the Opposition. While I personally preferred the longer version, which I hope can be reverted to in due course, I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with the shorter one.
I refer the Honourable Herders to the likely outcry if this change had occurred during the Blair years. The outcry from Conservatives would have been louder than some of TSE's shoes.
The time taken by the politicians to lay their wreaths is negligible but the symbolism is not.
Cameron would do well to advise that such changes are not merited and recommend that the present arrangements are kept in place.
Do you know that was the first thought that came into my mind! After all the howls about “disrespect” from the sanctimonius right, too!
Bizarre colour schemes, filthy bathrooms and someone sleeping in a messy bedroom are just some of the unbelievably bad pictures posted by estate agents in their misguided bid to sell properties.
Bathroom walls covered ceiling to floor in mould, a swimming pool full of green algae and a living room crammed with oriental souvenirs including life-size statues and several plants are examples of the bizarre images designed to promote the properties.
Miss Plato, as is known, I am upright man of impeccable moral standing. There's nothing desirable about a mostly drunk fornicating thief, endowed with all the loyalty of a nymphomaniac and the moral consistency of a latter day Roman emperor.
Mr. Dodd, thanks. I wrote the character in the reverse manner (ie gave him a long list of vices and then tried to find one or two virtues [he's nice to horses]). Fun but tricky to write a selfish, conniving git in a likeable way.
Ahem. I should be writing [serious stuff] now.
I remember my step-children had a discussion about which fictional character I most resembled. My step-daughter thought Maester Luwin from A Game of Thrones, which was quite nice.
My step-son thought Mister Burns from the Simpsons.
One of the controversial issues discussed last night was the shortening of the cenotaph ceremony with Cameron laying the only political wreath. I suggest that a solution nobody could possibly object to is have the wreath laid by the Speaker. (Also, how about raising tax on sugary products one at a time, budget by budget, finishing, in about 50 year's time with plain chocolate digestive biscuits?)
The Prime Minister represents the country as a whole, regardless of what party he or she comes from.
Why are people trying to make political capital out of this?
Utter bilge.
HM The Queen represents the country in all its majesty and splendour.
Cameron is head of government and as PM is first among equals as his party representative at the Cenotaph. No change is required.
Of course the PM has a different role to the Queen, and to suggest otherwise is ridiculous.
But if the ceremony needs to be shorter (on which I have no view) I don't see why the PM can't represent the "political class"
I refer you to your earlier statement that was totally inaccurate or "ridiculous", whichever you prefer.
The reason why all party leaders should be represented and lay wreaths individually is the show of political solidarity it confers.
Cameron is not the "political class" at such times but simply one element, albeit an important one, of the broader spectrum of our democracy. Neither should the event be seen as overtly party political as might be seen if only Cameron was deemed as suitable for the role.
Imagine PM Attlee singularly taking the role and denying Churchill in the post war years.
Farage made the point last night that whether a ginger beer costs 65p or 75p he would still buy it, but what stopped him was finding out there were 14 teaspoons full of sugar in each can
I found the protein shakes I was drinking contained 12 spoons of sugar and changed to a healthier and more expensive brand
So maybe a simple symbol of s spoon with a number next to rather than a tax would be best .
Good suggestion!
I look at calories on the front when its there but that's about it; the sugar number (and other numbers) is fairly incomprehensible and generally ignored. Having all pre-packaged food and drink have a "teaspoons of sugar" per serving would make sense, since that's a unit of measurement easily understood.
Thank you!
I think If you divide the Carbohydrates 'of which sugar' number by 4, that is the amount of teaspoons full per 100g... So it is already there but a bit hard to find
Bizarre colour schemes, filthy bathrooms and someone sleeping in a messy bedroom are just some of the unbelievably bad pictures posted by estate agents in their misguided bid to sell properties.
Bathroom walls covered ceiling to floor in mould, a swimming pool full of green algae and a living room crammed with oriental souvenirs including life-size statues and several plants are examples of the bizarre images designed to promote the properties.
Clinton v Trump seems most likely. Even if Carson wins Iowa Trump should be second and then win New Hampshire. Sanders may win New Hampshire but Hillary will win overall
Hm. Not so sure, and I have bet accordingly. Too much attention is being focused on these early states. They give momentum and also losing badly may mean funders desert, but the likes of Jeb know the rich pickings, delegates-wise, are in later states such as Texas & Florida which come in March.
That was the Giuliani strategy in 2008 it was a disaster. If you do not win at least one of Iowa or NH you will not be nominee
I don't think that's strictly true. You do, however, need to turn up and you do need to be in the game. Giuliani's mistake was that by not even competing in the early states, he wasn't talked about and lost credibility. In a field the size of the GOP's current one, you can finish third or fourth and keep going. It's a small run-in to Super Tuesday this time and money will still count heavily.
You can just about get away with a second, as Bill Clinton did in New Hampshire in 1992, but no lower
Dreadfully sorry if this has been posted before, but we’ve been having BT problems. (Now, happily , sorted) However eventually enjoying this morning’s Guardian I came across this. It concerms “Im a Celebrity” "Simon Danczuk, the outspoken MP for Rochdale, who has called the Labour party under Corbyn a “deluded, bullying cult”, said he could not comment on whether he had also been asked to take part, fuelling speculation he could be considering a trip to the Australian jungle with Ant and Dec."
Clinton v Trump seems most likely. Even if Carson wins Iowa Trump should be second and then win New Hampshire. Sanders may win New Hampshire but Hillary will win overall
=============== I doubt it ; she will surely be the Dem candidate and the early favorite but this time next year I expect the republicans to be surging to victory ....Hillary doesn't have the benefit of incumbency and after two Democratic terms the odds favour a Republican .Futhermore , Hillary has such a smug , preening sense of entitlement that will surely tempt fate ; she is a very devisive figure that generates both love and hate and the very thought of her and Bill back in the Whitehouse will turn many voters off ...she reminds me of an aging actress or rock star who cannot accept that she is just not wanted anymore ; rather like Madonna prancing around on the stage like she did thirty years ago I suspect that she will be defeated by a young dynamic Republican from a hard scrabble background who can match her in debates ; indeed it is ironic that the traditional roles could be reversed and instead of a rich white establishment Republican being matched against a young charasmatic Democrat you may instead have a rich white establishment Hillary being defeated by a Kenedy-esque Republican by the name of MARCO RUBIO !
Trump will be nominee not Rubio in my view, he is too pro immigration for the base on its present mood. George W Bush was charismatic and beat the white establishment Democrats Al Gore and John Kerry
I've just taken a call from somebody calling on behalf of the European Commission asking me to take part in a survey about SMEs after which I receive a £15 Amazon voucher.
I've just taken a call from somebody calling on behalf of the European Commission asking me to take part in a survey about SMEs after which I receive a £15 Amazon voucher.
Ever wondered where our £55m a day goes?
The sooner we're out of this mess the better
I used to get these hoax calls all the time until I signed up for Caller Display!
Miss Plato, legal highs seem very difficult. Anything effective may be so broad that the legislation traps other, perfectly legitimate (as it were) drugs. Anything specific can be, and has been, easily side-stepped by tweaking the chemical composition of the drug.
Of course, if some people weren't bloody muppets, taking weird, unknown drugs with unknown effects, this wouldn't be an issue.
Never taken drugs myself (and very rarely drink), but legal highs seem far more foolish to me than even 'established' drugs, where you have a better idea of what they're supposed to do (although bad batches and being cut with rat poison remains a problem).
People take legal highs because they want the effects of the "real" drug but are afraid of the criminal consequences. It would be much safer all round if the real deal were legal and controlled.
So maybe a simple symbol of s spoon with a number next to rather than a tax would be best .
That is a brilliantly simple idea!
Thanks!
Seconded. Excellent idea.
I think the packaging needs to show both the number of teaspoons per package and per serving, or if just one then per package. People also need to know how this translates to the recommended intake (6/7 per day)
Comments
Great news for the north-east - my birthplace. Ozzy really is marching into the Labour heartlands here.
I wouldn't rule out some kind of independent either standing and holding their deposit, though that will depend on the candidate.
Leaked memo reveals high-profile Labour MPs are under threat from left-wing activists
Politicians including Harriet Harman, Chuka Umunna and ex-mayoral candidate David Lammy are believed to be among the targets of left-wing activists looking to oust them from their seats
http://bit.ly/1Nr7JiP
Sitting MPs would have to accept a suspension in the style of Nadine right?
Indeed. Its just going to be wonderful watching these tweedy marxists lecturing the Gillian Duffys in Oldham shopping centre.
How Cambridge Five spies turned on each other: Kim Philby exposed two of his fellow recruits to save himself when their double lives unravelled
http://dailym.ai/1MIi9rb
HM The Queen represents the country in all its majesty and splendour.
Cameron is head of government and as PM is first among equals as his party representative at the Cenotaph. No change is required.
Not sure if I am reading this correctly, but the author appears to be:
a) drastically over egging her job (magazine editor) or drastically underpaid for it. Perhaps it is part time
b) retraining as a student but yearning for a middle class life
Perhaps the most objectionable bit is about her son not being able to go to university because she needs more money for the household. Seems incredibly poor show.
In short: articles like this and appearances by the likes of Ken Clarke last night suggest that, when even the edge cases are not that bad, the tax credits reform is going to be a success despite all the naysaying.
At last, the real reason this is being opposed tooth and nail by the opposition.
On the other hand, she says she's got a full-time job and is a magazine editor. If the full-time job is being a writer, and the magazine editor gig is relatively small time, that could make the numbers stack up.
Of course, if people really want to help poorly paid authors, they should all buy my highly rated and reasonably priced books: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Thaddeus-White/e/B008C6RU98/
Look at all those lovely five star ratings. I bet not many authors have books which include lesbian cannibalism, or committing adultery on the first page.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Dodd, cross my heart and hope to be ritually sacrificed.
In fact, do Plaid want independence? They've always run shy of the Big Goal; happy enough to talk about devolution and the Welsh language but timid on independence itself.
Bush isn't running because he was picked to do so by a member of his family but rather because he has inherited the advantages and system that those members who went before him had.
If there were genuine security concerns then the police have a right to act to protect the public and potential targets. Simply waving flags is not sufficient evidence to identify someone as a threat.
If they did they would have to rename themselves 'party that moans incessantly about not getting enough money from a country it openly despises'.
Actually, that might go down quite well in Wales.
Labour win easily, Tories 2nd, UKIP third and saved deposit if they're lucky.
So I'll ask again - what price are Ukip to keep their deposit?
If you're frit of that - what price Ukip to poll 20% or higher?
100%.
Mr. Dodd, thanks. I wrote the character in the reverse manner (ie gave him a long list of vices and then tried to find one or two virtues [he's nice to horses]). Fun but tricky to write a selfish, conniving git in a likeable way.
Ahem. I should be writing [serious stuff] now.
The thread a few weeks ago on Corbyn's dress choice for the occasion showed how the formal ceremony has expanded over recent years. Not that long ago there were only three party leaders who laid wreaths and three or four senior royals. Now there are phalanxes of both. Change has already taken place and a little trimming back, particularly given the advanced ages of Liz'n'Phil is not out of order.
I don't agree that Cameron is simply first among equals. He represents the Government; the other parties represent the Opposition. While I personally preferred the longer version, which I hope can be reverted to in due course, I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with the shorter one.
But if the ceremony needs to be shorter (on which I have no view) I don't see why the PM can't represent the "political class"
Well
http://imprimispharma.investorroom.com/2015-10-22-Imprimis-Pharmaceuticals-to-Make-Compounded-and-Customizable-Formulation-of-Pyrimethamine-and-Leucovorin-Available-for-Physicians-to-Prescribe-for-their-Patients-as-an-Alternative-to-Daraprim
"While we respect Turing's right to charge patients and insurance companies whatever it believes is appropriate, there may be more cost-effective compounded options for medications, such as Daraprim, for patients, physicians, insurance companies and pharmacy benefit managers to consider."
It now has a $1 US direct subsitute competitor !
The Tories need to be careful over this, but people aren't *entitled* to work at whatever takes their fancy and trust the state to make up their standard of living accordingly. Plenty of people work at jobs that they barely tolerate or actively detest.
Of course, if some people weren't bloody muppets, taking weird, unknown drugs with unknown effects, this wouldn't be an issue.
Never taken drugs myself (and very rarely drink), but legal highs seem far more foolish to me than even 'established' drugs, where you have a better idea of what they're supposed to do (although bad batches and being cut with rat poison remains a problem).
Farage made the point last night that whether a ginger beer costs 65p or 75p he would still buy it, but what stopped him was finding out there were 14 teaspoons full of sugar in each can
I found the protein shakes I was drinking contained 12 spoons of sugar and changed to a healthier and more expensive brand
So maybe a simple symbol of s spoon with a number next to rather than a tax would be best .
But I suspect the lady in the audience isn't building up equity.
However I understand it is not just concern about her personally but also the veterans who are also very old men now. In the biting November cold what is done should be what works for the surviving veterans and is respectful to the fallen, not what makes political parties smile.
The PM and the Monarch represent the country on occasions outside of politics.
@JamieRoss7: The absolute state of this. https://t.co/UpqeGDY4fI
I look at calories on the front when its there but that's about it; the sugar number (and other numbers) is fairly incomprehensible and generally ignored. Having all pre-packaged food and drink have a "teaspoons of sugar" per serving would make sense, since that's a unit of measurement easily understood.
You know Barack Obama was sleeping in the spare room that night.
They are intended to be used for when there is no suitable alternative (they are called Specials in the UK for that reason) - typically to do with allergens, taste-masking and and customised products for patients who find it hard to swallow.
None of this changes the fact that Martin Shkreli is an evil, gouging, villain who should be dragged around China by the balls.
Hattie I can understand. Especially after her "purge" attempts to rig the result.
The time taken by the politicians to lay their wreaths is negligible but the symbolism is not.
Cameron would do well to advise that such changes are not merited and recommend that the present arrangements are kept in place.
My step-son thought Mister Burns from the Simpsons.
The reason why all party leaders should be represented and lay wreaths individually is the show of political solidarity it confers.
Cameron is not the "political class" at such times but simply one element, albeit an important one, of the broader spectrum of our democracy. Neither should the event be seen as overtly party political as might be seen if only Cameron was deemed as suitable for the role.
Imagine PM Attlee singularly taking the role and denying Churchill in the post war years.
I think If you divide the Carbohydrates 'of which sugar' number by 4, that is the amount of teaspoons full per 100g... So it is already there but a bit hard to find
You can’t ride, I understand.
"Simon Danczuk, the outspoken MP for Rochdale, who has called the Labour party under Corbyn a “deluded, bullying cult”, said he could not comment on whether he had also been asked to take part, fuelling speculation he could be considering a trip to the Australian jungle with Ant and Dec."
Ever wondered where our £55m a day goes?
The sooner we're out of this mess the better
It would be much safer all round if the real deal were legal and controlled.
People also need to know how this translates to the recommended intake (6/7 per day)